Saturday, July 09, 2011

The GOP should stand its ground -- and fix bayonets.

An Establishment in Panic

By refusing to accept tax increases in a deal to raise the debt ceiling, Republicans are behaving like "fanatics," writes David Brooks of The New York Times.

Anti-tax Republicans "have no sense of moral decency," he adds.

They are "willing to stain their nation's honor" to "worship their idol." If this "deal of the century" goes down, as he calls the Barack Obama offer, "Republican fanaticism" will be the cause.

"The GOP has become a cult" that has replaced reason with "feverish" and "cockamamie beliefs," writes Richard Cohen of The Washington Post. The Republican "presidential field (is) a virtual political Jonestown," the Guyana site where more than 900 followers of the Peoples Temple drank the Kool-Aid that Rev. Jim Jones mixed for them.

Does anyone think this an appropriate description of such mild-mannered men as Mitt Romney, Tim Pawlenty and Jon Huntsman?

"The GOP's Hezbollah Wing Is Now Fully in Control," screams The New Republic over a recent lead editorial.

Other columnists charge the GOP with holding America "hostage" by refusing to accept tax hikes to avert a default on the debt.

What to make of this hysteria?

The Establishment is in a panic. It has been jolted awake to the realization that the GOP House, if it can summon the courage to use it, is holding a weapon that could enable it to bridle forever the federal monster that consumes 25 percent of gross domestic product.

To bully and blackmail the GOP into surrendering the weapon and betraying its principles and signing on to new taxes, that establishment has unleashed rhetoric more befitting a war on terror than a political dispute.

For how, exactly, are Republicans threatening the republic?

The House has not said it will not raise the debt ceiling. It must and will. It has not said it will not accept budget cuts. It has indicated a willingness to accept the budget cuts agreed to in the Biden negotiations.

Where the GOP has stood its ground is on tax increases.

Is fanaticism behind this stance? Does this manifest insanity? How does this imperil the nation's honor and future?

Behind the GOP opposition to tax hikes is the party's word given to the country that elected it in 2010, its political principles, its traditional view of what not to do when the nation is in a slump, and party history.

Fully 235 Republican House members signed a 2010 pledge not to raise taxes. And by giving their word they were rewarded with victory.

Should they now dishonor that pledge, what would differentiate them from George H.W. Bush, who famously promised in 1988: "Read my lips! No new taxes!" then went back on his word and took the party down to defeat with him?

Second, the GOP is the party of small government and low taxes.

Why would it agree to raise taxes on the private productive sector when federal spending, now at a peacetime record of 25 percent of GDP, is the problem?

Third, America is in a slump, with 9 percent of the workforce unemployed, another 7 percent underemployed and the economy growing at a tepid 1.8 percent.

What school of economic thought -- Keynesian, supply-side or monetarist -- says raising taxes in a slumping economy is the recipe for a return to prosperity? There is no such school.

Why, when the whole country is talking about the need to create jobs, would Congress raise taxes on a private productive sector that employs six in seven Americans and is the creator of real jobs?

In 1982, President Reagan agreed to the same deal being offered the party today: three dollars in spending cuts for every dollar in tax increases to which he assented. As he ruefully told this writer more than once, he was lied to. He got one dollar in spending cuts for every three in tax increases.

What of the charge that the Republican House is holding America hostage, blackmailing the nation with a suicidal threat to throw us all into national default if it does not get its way?

This smear is the precise opposite of the truth.

The Republican Party has not said it will refuse to raise the debt ceiling. It has an obligation to do so, and will.

The House has simply said it will not accept new taxes on a nation whose fiscal crisis comes from overspending.

If the GOP keeps its word, raises the debt ceiling and accepts budget cuts agreed to in the Biden negotiations, the only people who can prevent the debt ceiling's being raised are Senate Democrats or Obama, in which case, they, not the GOP, will have thrown the nation into default.

It is the establishment that is resorting to extortion, saying, in effect, to the House GOP: Give us the new taxes we demand, or Obama will veto the debt ceiling and we will all blame you for the default.

While Ron Paul has an innovative approach to the debt ceiling delemia.

the Texas congressman has spent the last week touting his own solution to the government’s money woes: Forgive the debt the U.S. Treasury owes the Federal Reserve and chop $1.7 trillion from the nation’s sizable $14.4 trillion debt.

“It’s not the ultimate reform that’s needed, but it’s a start,” Paul told The Des Moines Register. “What we have is a situation where we essentially have a debt to ourselves. It doesn’t make a lot of sense, but it is counted in our deficit.”

The 9/11 truth is out on the internet.This is the truth: The WTC was destroyed by 3 underground thermo-nuclear explosions. They were detonated by the US government which used this as an excuse to lead the US and its allies into invading Afghanistan and Iraq. All these wars and deaths were based on a lie.

Goebbels: “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.”

Will you help to tell the truth to the world?

www.mathaba.net/news/?x=625926

www.911-truth.net/Be sure to watch the 26 part video there. #4 is on the built-in nuclear demolition scheme of the WTCwww.911-truth.net/911_WTC_nuclear_demolition_Dimitri_Khalezov_part04.mp4#14 in on Building 7, which collapsed even though no plane hit it.www.911-truth.net/911_WTC_nuclear_demolition_Dimitri_Khalezov_part14.mp4#24/25 is on the chronic radiation sickness of the WTC responderswww.911-truth.net/911_WTC_nuclear_demolition_Dimitri_Khalezov_part24.mp4www.911-truth.net/911_WTC_nuclear_demolition_Dimitri_Khalezov_part25.mp4

Why not have Treasury issue currency for specific infrastructure and capital projects which will all be fee for service? The contractors on the project would be paid in the currency and as fees are collected in excess of operating costs, the specific currency could be withdrawn from circulation. That would require no additional borrowing. The completed projects could be privatized after completion.

We are, truthfully, on the verge of another Great Depression. Our only saving circumstance is: this time we have some safety nets in place, and the local banks haven't failed. FDIC might be the most valuable government progam ever passed.

The parallels between our situation today, and the situation that landed us in Great Depression I are overwhelming.

The only thing that's saved us so far is we didn't have two years of Hoover before we went to the polls.

The Democrats are not bluffing, Mr Obama will invoke the 14th Amendment and by-pass the "obstructionists" in the House of Representatives.

Where it only so.

As they say in investing, past results are no guarantee of future performance; however, since the GOP has taken over the House, Obama has shown a willingness to fold like a cheap suit when it comes to the big stuff.

I fear what will happen is we will end up with some interim deal that kicks the can down the road a few months.

Spurred on by the commercial interests of the sport outfitters and other local tourist traps, the local farmers, neer-do-wells, and other yokels, pick up their pitch forks and venture forth into the woods in search of the 'children of the night'.

Later, bone-weary and slightly hung over the mob exits the woods with the chant, "We'll get em tomarrow."

Sitting on the porch with a heady brewski buzz, Bob turns to Walt and says, "maybe we'll go awolfing with them tomarrow. That's if I get around to cleaning the rust off my gun. Hey, pass me another beer."

State law authorizes the Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife (WDFW) “to pay claims for damages to crops caused by wild deer or elk in an amount of up to ten thousand dollars per claim” (RCW 77.36.040). For the purposes of paying claims for crop damage, state law defines a “crop” as “a commercially raised horticultural and/or agricultural product and includes growing or harvested product but does not include livestock. For the purposes of this chapter all parts of horticultural trees shall be considered a crop and shall be eligible for claims.” (RCW 77.36.010 (1)).

Crop damages payable under RCW 77.36 are limited to the value of such commercially raised horticultural or agricultural crops, whether growing or harvested, and will be paid only to the owner of the crop at the time of damage, without assignment. Damage to other real or personal property including other vegetation or animals, damages caused by animals other than wild deer or elk, lost profits, consequential damages, or any other damages whatsoever are not covered under RCW 77.36. Crop loss covered by other insurance for wildlife damage will not be eligible for State compensation.

Wild elk are found in northwest Minnesota and while relatively rare, they sometimes cause considerable crop damage in this area. To help reduce the impact on area farmers the Minnesota Department of Agriculture has a program to compensate farmers for crops damaged by elk. This helps reduce complaints due to elk damage and allows the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources to manage elk in a way that will insure they remain part of northwest Minnesota for years to come.

Farmers and ranchers seeking compensation need to follow specific reporting procedures to be eligible for state reimbursement. A DNR conservation officer or county extension educator will investigate and verify the elk damage for compensation. Farmers complete an application for state compensation and the report is sent to the county extension office for a market value determination. The request is then sent to the MDA for payment.

Claim forms are available from University of Minnesota Extension offices in the counties where elk occur.

In 1982, President Reagan agreed to the same deal being offered the party today: three dollars in spending cuts for every dollar in tax increases to which he assented. As he ruefully told this writer more than once, he was lied to. He got one dollar in spending cuts for every three in tax increases.

Buchanan is a Putz.

Like most Republicans, neocons, paleo, or Tea Party, they cite Ronald Reagan as the end-all and be-all of successful supply-side economics. Yet, they forget or ignore the whole Reagan story on taxes, spending, deficits, and the size of government.

In fact, it can be argued that Reagan was the one that changed our government from one of ‘tax and spend’ to one of ‘barrow and spend’.

While Reagan didn’t face many of the problems we do today, the similarities and political fights were striking. Reagan came into office during a time of recession, huge deficits (for the times), and a sharp political divide over the size of government and the role of taxes. In 1981, true to his philosophy of lower taxes and smaller government, he pushed through a huge tax cut, a 23% reduction spread over three years. He also had the rates indexed for inflation to avoid bracket keep. The reductions included more generous cuts for business. In 1986, he instituted even more tax reductions.

This is the only part of the Reagan legacy that the GOP remembers or talks about. However, there is another side.

While Reagan was wedded to his supply-side philosophy of smaller government and lower taxes, he was also a pragmatist. He knew that you can’t just keep on spending forever without having to pay for those bills. In five years under Reagan, the budget deficit went from $1 trillion to $2 trillion. In the 12 years of Reagan/Bush I, the deficit moved from $1 trillion to $4 trillion.

Reagan’s solution? In 1983, based on recommendations from a commission headed by Alan Greenspan (one of the architects of our current problems), Reagan pushed through “the fix” for Social Security. Not only did it increase the FICA tax significantly, it also allowed for the FICA funds to go directly into the general fund. Thus, Reagan created a giant slush fund that could be used to help finance his increased spending. Quite a hit to the poor and middle classes.

However, Reagan wasn’t done. In 1984, Reagan pushed through the biggest tax hike the nation had seen other than in wartime. It hit the rich hard. The act eliminated many significant tax breaks and loopholes and lead to base-broadening in the tax systems. As you can imagine, this didn’t win him many friends within his own party. Between Social Security reform and the 1984 tax increase it pretty much offset the results of the two tax reductions he implemented.

It is ironic that those who throw up Reagan’s name in discussions on the debt ceiling and taxes ignore the fact that Reagan did exactly what the Dems are asking the GOP to agree to, cut loopholes and tax breaks to the rich.

“The private aircraft MUST BE a Lear 60 or larger (as defined by interior cabin space) for West Coast Events; or, a Hawker 800 or Larger (as defined by interior cabin space for) East Coast Events, and both are subject to the Speaker’s approval. The Speaker Reserves the right to change the flight plans at any time,” the contract states.

Aaron Fielding recording Mitt Romney during an Independence Day parade in Amherst, N.H.At 27, he is a full-time “tracker” for American Bridge 21st Century, a new Democratic organization that aims to record every handshake, every utterance by Republican candidates in 2011 and 2012, looking for gotcha moments that could derail political ambitions or provide fodder for television advertisements by liberal groups next year.

The organization has hired a dozen professional trackers like Mr. Fielding, outfitted them with the latest high-tech cameras and computers and positioned them in key states where Republican candidates are busy chattering away to voters. If all works as planned, incriminating moments captured by American Bridge will quickly become part of the political bloodstream.

Mexican officials blamed turf wars between some of the country's most brutal drug cartels for a wave of violence across the nation that killed more than 40 people in three attacks, including 21 people massacred in a night club in the northern business capital of Monterrey,...

1. We are learning the wrong lessons from the last one. Was the housing bubble really caused by Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, the Community Reinvestment Act, Barney Frank, Bill Clinton, “liberals” and so on? That’s what a growing army of people now claim. There’s just one problem. If so, then how come there was a gigantic housing bubble in Spain as well? Did Barney Frank cause that, too (and while in the minority in Congress, no less!)? If so, how? And what about the giant housing bubbles in Ireland, the U.K. and Australia? All Barney Frank? And the ones across Eastern Europe, and elsewhere? I’d laugh, but tens of millions are being suckered into this piece of spin, which is being pushed in order to provide cover so the real culprits can get away. And it’s working

Magnificent Ronald and the Founding Fathers of al Qaeda

“These gentlemen are the moral equivalents of America’s founding fathers.” — Ronald Reagan while introducing the Mujahideen leaders to media on the White house lawns (1985). During Reagan’s 8 years in power, the CIA secretly sent billions of dollars of military aid to the mujahedeen in Afghanistan in a US-supported jihad against the Soviet Union. We repeated the insanity with ISIS against Syria.